Another SFP vs FFP post

And I would agree, if I can’t see the center aiming point on low power, the scope doesn’t make any sense to hunt with.
However, I would put the Swfa reticle up against any sfp reticle I’ve used as far as how useable it is at low mag.
It's not that I can't see the crosshair. I see it. I can't really make out the hashes at lowest power, but I see the whole thing

It's entirely mental on my part. I am not seeing the crosshair that a deep, conditioned part of my brain WANTS. It WANTS a standard duplex reticle. The same duplex reticle it has seen 10s, if not hundreds of thousands of times either just peeking through a scope when I was young and dumb and didn't carry binos or taking a shot in practice or hunting.

This is why I'm asking if there is a benefit worth working to recondition my brain for.

I'm sure the scope is fine in the right hands, I'm just not sure mine are
 
Full disclosure I have not taken the s2h class or any that in depth. But I have taken a couple 1 day classes at local clubs years ago to learn some basics. As well as a couple summers shotting tactical 3 gun matches for fun. I would say if you are thirsty for knowledge, want to improve your skills, and can find somethingthat fits your budget, go for it. Even if you trade a little hunting time for it. It is still outdoors, it is still hunt related, it still builds skills, and you will probably be able to either use or shoot different equipment you never have used before.
 
It's not that I can't see the crosshair. I see it. I can't really make out the hashes at lowest power, but I see the whole thing

It's entirely mental on my part. I am not seeing the crosshair that a deep, conditioned part of my brain WANTS. It WANTS a standard duplex reticle. The same duplex reticle it has seen 10s, if not hundreds of thousands of times either just peeking through a scope when I was young and dumb and didn't carry binos or taking a shot in practice or hunting.

This is why I'm asking if there is a benefit worth working to recondition my brain for.

I'm sure the scope is fine in the right hands, I'm just not sure mine are
All good man.
To paraphrase my original post, you’ve clearly thought it through, and a ffp scope doesn’t have much to offer right now. And that’s ok.
It’s not some status symbol to show others that “you’ve arrived” as a hunter. It’s a tool like any other. If you’re not in a situation where you think it gives an advantage, then go with something that will. 🤙🤙
 
It's not that I can't see the crosshair. I see it. I can't really make out the hashes at lowest power, but I see the whole thing

It's entirely mental on my part. I am not seeing the crosshair that a deep, conditioned part of my brain WANTS. It WANTS a standard duplex reticle. The same duplex reticle it has seen 10s, if not hundreds of thousands of times either just peeking through a scope when I was young and dumb and didn't carry binos or taking a shot in practice or hunting.

This is why I'm asking if there is a benefit worth working to recondition my brain for.

I'm sure the scope is fine in the right hands, I'm just not sure mine are

SFP with CAPPED turrets is ideal for what you are doing.

You arent missing anything as long as you stay doing what you are doing. I really like my older vx6 2-12 for woods stuff. And for woods, you'll never dial. Dont have that failure mode and get something with capped turrets.

FFP reticles come into play when we start shooting past 300+ consistently, and really become necessary for wind holds. Really need a lot of rounds through that system to be competent and confident with it.

Someone mentioned a 6x swfa. Ive been in too many situations where 3x was too much to think that would be relevant. Personally I'd want my scope to start with 2x.


You gotta remember most of the guys on here are really trying to maximize their ability to kill stuff further and out west. Doesn't make it right for the woods.

And maybe youre just an old dog...i put THE maven on my dads new gun. "So the 1 means 100 and the 2 means 200 etc". No dad. The caps being exposed has me worried with him too 😆. Its just too much going on for an old codger.
 
You gotta remember most of the guys on here are really trying to maximize their ability to kill stuff further and out west. Doesn't make it right for the woods.

I’ve been noticing this a lot in here lately. Western vs Eastern hunters telling each other they’re wrong because they use different skills/gear in different ways. There’s also the odd few trying to make them selves change their system because a few guys that live thousands of miles away say that it’s the best thing since sliced bread.
 
I’ve been noticing this a lot in here lately. Western vs Eastern hunters telling each other they’re wrong because they use different skills/gear in different ways. There’s also the odd few trying to make them selves change their system because a few guys that live thousands of miles away say that it’s the best thing since sliced bread.
For myself, I wanted a "better" optic. My old glass was a 1978 Redfield 4-12x with the "accu range" reticle which is a really clever use of subtension in a SFP scope.

I had some non-negotiables such as a larger objective lens (50mm or larger) and a 30mm tube, variable power with a 2x or 3x bottom end and a moderate upper end. I ended up with a 3-15x variable but a 2-10x or a 3-9x is just as good. I did NOT want a crazy tacti-cool 'christmas tree' type reticle just for hunting nor did I want fancy sniper knobs to get messed up busting through brush. Capped or lockable turrets are great but exposed knobs were a hard no.

I wound up with the Burris Veracity MAD 3-15. The glass is pretty good. I like the capped turrets. I can't with the reticle without a lot of practice.

I think I'm going to wind up putting a Maven or mid-level Vortex like a Viper on the rifle.

Thank you to everyone for their input. This has been a great conversation
 
SFP with CAPPED turrets is ideal for what you are doing.

You arent missing anything as long as you stay doing what you are doing. I really like my older vx6 2-12 for woods stuff. And for woods, you'll never dial. Dont have that failure mode and get something with capped turrets.

FFP reticles come into play when we start shooting past 300+ consistently, and really become necessary for wind holds. Really need a lot of rounds through that system to be competent and confident with it.

Someone mentioned a 6x swfa. Ive been in too many situations where 3x was too much to think that would be relevant. Personally I'd want my scope to start with 2x.


You gotta remember most of the guys on here are really trying to maximize their ability to kill stuff further and out west. Doesn't make it right for the woods.

And maybe youre just an old dog...i put THE maven on my dads new gun. "So the 1 means 100 and the 2 means 200 etc". No dad. The caps being exposed has me worried with him too 😆. Its just too much going on for an old codger.
I do have goals to climb a mountain and chase an elk. They're 'stretch' goals and, between my age and the ever-escalating costs they may never materialize.

I am a bit of an old dog, but I'm mentally pretty flexible. I understand external ballistics pretty well, but I also understand that Murphy of Murphy's Law fame love to hang out on the sides of hills and in the middle of laurel and rose thickets, poking his fingers where they don't belong and simple works a lot better than fancy. I don't like things that fail easily.

I, too, am a touch skeptical of the fixed 6. I had a deer standing a whopping 6 feet behind me that I spun and shot with a 3x and all I could see was brown.

I think I'm going to play with my rifles a bit and set up 2. The 7 Mag, which is the rifle this topic surrounds, with a decent SFP scope and a light straight wall with a red dot for urban deer.
 
I do have goals to climb a mountain and chase an elk. They're 'stretch' goals and, between my age and the ever-escalating costs they may never materialize.

I looked into the S2H class and it is simply not within my budget.

To do it and do it properly, I need a second rifle system plus ammunition, travel and the cost of the class. All told I'd be close to 10k into a shooting class, give or take 10%.

While I am sure it is a great class, I simply can't afford to make it a reality. Or rather, I would be sacrificing the one thing I would need the class for, hunting somewhere cool, for the class itself which makes very little sense to me.

I can't make bold pronouncements based on someone else's life circumstances with much certainty but reading between the lines here:

If I were you, I'd engage in the most realistic practice I could, at 0-400 yards, and then go on one quality guided elk hunt. Find a private land hunt, not one that brags about killing monster bulls, just one that has good sized chunks of private land where they control the hunting pressure and can reliably get you within 400 yards of a branch-antlered bull elk that isn't running/hiding and you aren't worried about some other hunter shooting it while you fiddle with your bipod or whatever.

Show up to THAT hunt with any basic decently accurate rifle that you can hit a pie plate with at 400+ yards under field conditions and I believe you will get the elk-itch scratched.

The most valuable commodity you have, is time. You can trade that time for money and then trade that money for skill or trade it for experience. My first couple of western trips, I had no skill, or money, or time - I was still a teenager - and I scratched down the world's smallest mule deer. Later in life I had a little skill and a little money and shot a 4x5 bull elk. A bit later I shot a cow that required what I considered to be a great deal of skill - dad shot a cow, the herd took off running, and when they'd ran perhaps 125 yards they stopped and milled for a few seconds and when one stepped free I shot her and killed her under a very real time constraint. Later still, I killed a pretty nice 5x5 (he's shoulder mounted on my wall now) with a longer shot, but I had much more time. He was further than the cow, and I didn't waste any time once the decision was made to shoot, but it was a chip shot compared to the time stress of the cow.

I'd like to think that the cow represented a high water mark for me in terms of the underlying skill required to put her on the ground. Part of me wants more skill. But a different part of me knows that the greater desire, is the experience. I can't tell you how to spend your money but I can tell you that I care less than zero about spending a single dollar for a shooting class but I'd spend $10k in the blink of an eye to go on a quality hunt again if I had the extra cash sitting around. One, because of the experience itself. Two, because at the end of the day I'm not the kind of guy who values the skill aspect of hunting. You need the skills, for sure, but hunting is not a competitive shooting sport, or it isn't such the way I see and define it. I value the experience more.

The third elk that I mention above - shooting him was almost an afterthought. The previous afternoon I got notice that my dad had killed what is likely his 'once in a lifetime' bull, on the same trip, a few miles down the road, then I spent the rest of the evening watching three small bulls, one of which was legal (but not big enough to interest me), feed across a meadow, then enter a lake and splash around like three teenagers on a summer afternoon. After dark I went to congratulate my dad and admire his bull. *THAT* was the high water mark of the trip. Shooting the bull the next morning was just checking the last box. Don't get me wrong, I'd quite like to shoot another, but in a very real sense it wasn't the high point of the trip and if you understand what I mean by that, I'd suggest that you practice at home, use whatever scope reticle you think you need to be genuinely effective at 0-400 yards, and go elk hunting. You don't have to blow your retirement on a premium hunt with promises of 300"+ bulls, but don't skimp, either. Go somewhere with a reasonable expectation of a clean chance at a legal bull.
 
I do have goals to climb a mountain and chase an elk. They're 'stretch' goals and, between my age and the ever-escalating costs they may never materialize.

I am a bit of an old dog, but I'm mentally pretty flexible. I understand external ballistics pretty well, but I also understand that Murphy of Murphy's Law fame love to hang out on the sides of hills and in the middle of laurel and rose thickets, poking his fingers where they don't belong and simple works a lot better than fancy. I don't like things that fail easily.

I, too, am a touch skeptical of the fixed 6. I had a deer standing a whopping 6 feet behind me that I spun and shot with a 3x and all I could see was brown.

I think I'm going to play with my rifles a bit and set up 2. The 7 Mag, which is the rifle this topic surrounds, with a decent SFP scope and a light straight wall with a red dot for urban deer.
Setting up a 22 trainer with a ffp might be a good option if its something you want to try. I couldnt think of better woods hunting training then chasing squirrels.

In your position it doesnt sound like you need to "gearmax". Sounds like you need to prioritize rucking around the neighborhood, research elk hunting, and try to figure it out DIY (or pinch some pennies and get a guide... cow hunting is fun too btw).

The difference between being able to shoot 300 yards and 500 yards won't matter if you cant get within 500 miles of an elk! 😉
 
I can't make bold pronouncements based on someone else's life circumstances with much certainty but reading between the lines here:

If I were you, I'd engage in the most realistic practice I could, at 0-400 yards, and then go on one quality guided elk hunt. Find a private land hunt, not one that brags about killing monster bulls, just one that has good sized chunks of private land where they control the hunting pressure and can reliably get you within 400 yards of a branch-antlered bull elk that isn't running/hiding and you aren't worried about some other hunter shooting it while you fiddle with your bipod or whatever.

Show up to THAT hunt with any basic decently accurate rifle that you can hit a pie plate with at 400+ yards under field conditions and I believe you will get the elk-itch scratched.

The most valuable commodity you have, is time. You can trade that time for money and then trade that money for skill or trade it for experience. My first couple of western trips, I had no skill, or money, or time - I was still a teenager - and I scratched down the world's smallest mule deer. Later in life I had a little skill and a little money and shot a 4x5 bull elk. A bit later I shot a cow that required what I considered to be a great deal of skill - dad shot a cow, the herd took off running, and when they'd ran perhaps 125 yards they stopped and milled for a few seconds and when one stepped free I shot her and killed her under a very real time constraint. Later still, I killed a pretty nice 5x5 (he's shoulder mounted on my wall now) with a longer shot, but I had much more time. He was further than the cow, and I didn't waste any time once the decision was made to shoot, but it was a chip shot compared to the time stress of the cow.

I'd like to think that the cow represented a high water mark for me in terms of the underlying skill required to put her on the ground. Part of me wants more skill. But a different part of me knows that the greater desire, is the experience. I can't tell you how to spend your money but I can tell you that I care less than zero about spending a single dollar for a shooting class but I'd spend $10k in the blink of an eye to go on a quality hunt again if I had the extra cash sitting around. One, because of the experience itself. Two, because at the end of the day I'm not the kind of guy who values the skill aspect of hunting. You need the skills, for sure, but hunting is not a competitive shooting sport, or it isn't such the way I see and define it. I value the experience more.

The third elk that I mention above - shooting him was almost an afterthought. The previous afternoon I got notice that my dad had killed what is likely his 'once in a lifetime' bull, on the same trip, a few miles down the road, then I spent the rest of the evening watching three small bulls, one of which was legal (but not big enough to interest me), feed across a meadow, then enter a lake and splash around like three teenagers on a summer afternoon. After dark I went to congratulate my dad and admire his bull. *THAT* was the high water mark of the trip. Shooting the bull the next morning was just checking the last box. Don't get me wrong, I'd quite like to shoot another, but in a very real sense it wasn't the high point of the trip and if you understand what I mean by that, I'd suggest that you practice at home, use whatever scope reticle you think you need to be genuinely effective at 0-400 yards, and go elk hunting. You don't have to blow your retirement on a premium hunt with promises of 300"+ bulls, but don't skimp, either. Go somewhere with a reasonable expectation of a clean chance at a legal bull.
This is largely where I am aiming. The costs seem to be climbing faster than I can sock money away, but I'm not an easily dissuaded man. It only took 33 years to tag my first buck, a couple extra years working towards an elk mean nothing. My "trophy" standards are incredibly low. I'd shoot a cow or a spike in the face and be the happiest dude on the mountain.

I figure a quality guided trip like you're describing will run me close to 10k all in with tags, tips travel, processing, taxidermy if I choose and time off work, and that's today prices. I probably can't reasonably swing it for 2 years, so I figure 15-20% more if I'm lucky.

At the same time, I did a hog hunt in South Carolina a few years ago, had a blast and got a cooler full of fantastic meat. Maybe I do that again. Or a bear hunt in Maine.. or Ontario... Maybe I draw an elk tag in PA this year.. Doubtful, but someone gotta draw..


Physically, I tend to describe myself like a 1979 F250. I have some miles on the chassis, but I will load up all the stuff I need and I will get there. I make no time promises or fuel consumption promises but I will make it to the "X" and, if I'm not there, assume I'm dead along the way. I am reasonably fit for a 51-year-old with 2 spine surgeries and a couple near life altering injuries (torn biceps and herniated disc x3) I can still move pretty well. I restart ruck training Monday after my Saturday 10k trail race preparing for a "Train To Hunt" type archery event in August.

I don't quite know why I dumped like that, but I feel exactly what you're laying out and I wish like HELL I'd picked up as a teenager/early 20s kid and driven my stupid ass west and done SOMETHING. Now, I'm old and I have too many responsibilities to just pick up and go like that.
 
Setting up a 22 trainer with a ffp might be a good option if its something you want to try. I couldnt think of better woods hunting training then chasing squirrels.

In your position it doesnt sound like you need to "gearmax". Sounds like you need to prioritize rucking around the neighborhood, research elk hunting, and try to figure it out DIY (or pinch some pennies and get a guide... cow hunting is fun too btw).

The difference between being able to shoot 300 yards and 500 yards won't matter if you cant get within 500 miles of an elk! 😉
I gave this a bit of thought recently. There's an NRL22 league nearby. So, grab up a CZ457 Varmint in lefty, drop it in a chassis, swap the FFP over and do some shooting.

But that amounts to a $1000 spend that, I feel, would better be directed towards the hunt I want rather than a range and small game "toy" for lack of a better word.

I AM considering an air rifle. Something nitro piston in a .177 or .22 Caliber and building a "minisniping" range in the back yard.
 
What does FFP gain me that I don't understand?

I get the academics of it.

Subtention remains constant throughout the zoom range so the hash marks for elevation and windage are consistent from low to high power.

Why should I care?

If I'm taking a shot that requires figuring windage and elevation, I probably have the time to zoom or I probably shouldn't be taking the shot at all.

Right now, mentally, I can't take a quick shot because I'm not sufficiently accustomed to the small reticle at low power. I know how it works but it feels wrong and quick shots are more common than far shots.

So, I can either put a couple thousand rounds through a rifle at varying zoom levels which, if I am perfectly honest, I'm not inclined to do between putting 10k arrows a year down range and 3-5k pistol rounds down range plus trying to run or ruck 15 miles a week and work 40+.

Or I can dump the FFP scope, scoop up a decent piece of glass in SFP and go.

Eastern hunting tends to be a sub-100 yard proposition and 200 is a stretch shot most places I hunt, so long range is a range thing at best or shooting at varmints.

What say you all? What am I not understanding?
You summed it up. I have both, I like both, and I use both. I don’t find any of my FFP to be unsuitable for shorter ranges, but it’s a pretty nice advantage to have usable subtensions all the time, I do love a good 2-15/ 4-16 type scope… but sometimes 16 can be too much 10x or 12x is probably better for holding at 4-500 yards for me. I dunno my favorite and the scopes I’m most comfortable with at the 2.5-15 credos… I am liking my 3-9 Swfas but going from moa to mil is a bit of learning curve. Ultimately just gotta shoot what you are comfortable with and what works for you personally. I think there are advantages to both though.
 
There's an NRL22 league nearby. So, grab up a CZ457 Varmint in lefty, drop it in a chassis, swap the FFP over and do some shooting.
That sounds like an awesome idea.
Don’t discount the positive effect that the fellowship of being around like minded individuals can have in someone’s life.

I can also highly recommend pistol based competitions in addition to the NRL 22 comps.
 
If I'm taking a shot that requires figuring windage and elevation, I probably have the time to zoom or I probably shouldn't be taking the shot at all.


What say you all? What am I not understanding?
I think most people believe that more magnification equals more precision (accuracy) at longer range and try and buy that skill with higher power scopes. So most SFP scopes with any wind/drop in the reticle are way overpowered at max where the reticle works. It’s not that you are wrong about having time to zoom, it’s that you would end up with too much zoom and not enough FOV.

At the same time most people believe that they need a lower low end for close shots, rather than a better designed reticle. So we have a lot of FFP scopes with overly fine, complicated tree reticles in ever widening magnification ranges that just make a poor reticle design even worse.

If you are going do longer range practice, if it’s a skill you want to develop, then follow the advice you will get here for a few very specific FFP scopes and put in the time to get used to it. If not then get reliable SFP scope and spend your time getting better at shooting out to 300 from field positions. If it has drop hashes stick to a 3-9 or 2-10 so they are useable.
 
I think most people believe that more magnification equals more precision (accuracy) at longer range and try and buy that skill with higher power scopes. So most SFP scopes with any wind/drop in the reticle are way overpowered at max where the reticle works. It’s not that you are wrong about having time to zoom, it’s that you would end up with too much zoom and not enough FOV.

At the same time most people believe that they need a lower low end for close shots, rather than a better designed reticle. So we have a lot of FFP scopes with overly fine, complicated tree reticles in ever widening magnification ranges that just make a poor reticle design even worse.

If you are going do longer range practice, if it’s a skill you want to develop, then follow the advice you will get here for a few very specific FFP scopes and put in the time to get used to it. If not then get reliable SFP scope and spend your time getting better at shooting out to 300 from field positions. If it has drop hashes stick to a 3-9 or 2-10 so they are useable.
I don't disagree with your assessment and I'll add something.

As an Eastern hunter with dreams of western mountains, one of my first big purchases was a pair of binoculars. I've upgraded several times since the late 90s but I was definitely a weirdo carrying binos in the woods in the 90s and I'm still a bit eccentric in that I'd sooner leave my weapon than my binos behind.

Many eastern guys use their rifle scope.as "glass" when they really ought to use binos so a higher zoom gives them "better" glass.
 
I gave this a bit of thought recently. There's an NRL22 league nearby. So, grab up a CZ457 Varmint in lefty, drop it in a chassis, swap the FFP over and do some shooting.

But that amounts to a $1000 spend that, I feel, would better be directed towards the hunt I want rather than a range and small game "toy" for lack of a better word.
Correction: $1000 for a training tool that will make you a better game shot, both there in the East and out West. You'll never justify the purchase by calling it a "toy." Sheesh. :D
 
As an Eastern hunter with dreams of western mountains, one of my first big purchases was a pair of binoculars. I've upgraded several times since the late 90s but I was definitely a weirdo carrying binos in the woods in the 90s and I'm still a bit eccentric in that I'd sooner leave my weapon than my binos behind.
Now you're the wierdo in the woods with new-aged FFP scopes that (when the reticle is well-designed) increase your shooting capability potential, but that doesn't make sense to the rest of the eastern hunters. :D
 
Now you're the wierdo in the woods with new-aged FFP scopes that (when the reticle is well-designed) increase your shooting capability potential, but that doesn't make sense to the rest of the eastern hunters. :D
And I'm 0% worried about what people think.

I want a system that works under the conditions I encounter.

Most of my pistols for hunting wear dots and I'm comfortable with them to 100. Add a scope and 300 isn't outside of possible.

As I think I've made clear, I'm not afraid to spend on good gear but my wallet isn't bottomless. The thought of sitting on the FFP scope is there. Put it on the 10/22 and play around with it. But I was hoping to use that money for a different scope...

I have thinking to do.
 
And I'm 0% worried about what people think.

I want a system that works under the conditions I encounter.

Most of my pistols for hunting wear dots and I'm comfortable with them to 100. Add a scope and 300 isn't outside of possible.

As I think I've made clear, I'm not afraid to spend on good gear but my wallet isn't bottomless. The thought of sitting on the FFP scope is there. Put it on the 10/22 and play around with it. But I was hoping to use that money for a different scope...

I have thinking to do.
Was just teasing. :)

As has been said by others, an FFP scope is unprecedented in flexibility and utility for hunting, but it hinges entirely on the reticle design and how it matches the magnification range. A good FFP reticle looks like a German #1/4 on low magnification, and a graduated reticle with precise angular hold marks on high magnification. Add illumination, and that becomes effectively a red dot on low mag and a mrad-based graduated reticle on high. Hard to beat that for versatility.

Not only that, but I have often been in situations where I want to use the reticle to hold and measure, but I want the FOV of mid-magnification to watch the animal's reaction after the shot (or watch where it goes relative to the rest of the herd). With a properly designed FFP hunting scope, I'm equally confident at barrel-burning ranges in the timber as I am at 500 meters on the open hillside. Such a scope would serve you well in the eastern woods as well as on the western slopes when you make your way out West.
 
Back
Top